Hi. I wrote the blog post here. > Every time I hear someone advocating for mainframes, they always praise them [1] I wasn't "advocating" anything. I was talki

Hi. I wrote the blog post here. > Every time I hear someone advocating for mainframes, they always praise them [1] I wasn't "advocating" anything. I was talking about how they've survived. They have survived. Whether it's under emulation doesn't matter: still being sold, still driving the same peripherals from the same software. Their survival, thus far, is a fact. So the question I was trying to address was why. That's not advocacy. [2] If I were, which I wasn't -- It is pretty hard to advocate for anything without praising it. :-) The points about performance others have answered very well. > How is this _not_ a good thing?? "You can have good, fast, or cheap. Pick any two." We have fast and cheap. The end. > people that like mainframes usually have some weird obsession with high level computing architectures Um. Define what you mean by "high level architectures" here?